[flaunf221]

> They are not idiots, but not everyone at that company will actually understand the duties that come with these licenses.

Copyright is not some kind of spiritual nonsense. It's law. You don't need to understand how, you just need to follow it. There can be legal questions on what exactly you can do, but those can arise for any kind of law.

Of course you could also ignore copyright law - but that's the same with any other law.

[bsimpson]

The internet is largely predicated on American law, because so much of it has been invented by Americans.

The EFF, Creative Commons, FSF - they're all based in America. The licenses they write are based on American legal concepts.

It's interesting to see a Czech CEO commenting on (and quoting) and English translation of Chinese law in the context of a license written in America. As he points out in the thread, AGPL is unenforceable against a Chinese company if China doesn't recognize the rights AGPL is predicated on.

[bnjms]

I would have guessed as much. I don’t understand why the west allows Chinese firms to act on their contracts a law when interacting with their markets. There is no reason to allow Bamboo to continue selling in North America or Europe if they’re out of compliance here. Sales can be blocked until compliance with local laws.

[kennywinker]

Companies are not moral. They will only follows laws when they are enforceable either thru the law, or thru social blowback. That’s not a chinese vs western thing, western companies are just as happy to ignore the law when they can - it’s just western IP frameworks are historically better enforced (socially and legally) in the west.

[iwontberude]

Customary law eats positive law for breakfast. It’s like trying to herd sovereign citizens.